Besides no president or former president has ever gone to prison. I think one went to jail (totally different in the USA) for 48 hours but that’s about it.
Let’s say Derek gets his way, how would it even work. Former presidents have protection for life so you couldn’t stick him in general population to meet Mr Motivator etc.
Best you could ever hope for is house arrest.
But think about it, rightly or wrongly Trump still has about 16 million supporters who probably own one or more firearms. That’s a rather large army to piss off regardless of the law of the land etc.
Maybe, Trump and BJ should share a cell ?
Don’t forget, if Trump thinks there is any chance of him sharing a cell with the home boys then he will be on a plane to sit beside Putin in cold but safe Russia and beyond all jurisdictions including Sir Kier and Co.
Derek, the Queen has always been above the law and so is any other individual, family or not if they in her presence unless she agrees they can be removed and arrested. As the law stands, the Met Police could be in the same room as her and Andrew with a warrant for him to attend court, she can tell them to leave and/or have them removed and nothing they can do. Unless someone is brave enough to change some laws etc.
US Presidential Election 2024
There's a first for everything. Most presidents don't go to prison because they're dictators and have to convict themselves.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:58 amBesides no president or former president has ever gone to prison. I think one went to jail (totally different in the USA) for 48 hours but that’s about it.
Let’s say Derek gets his way, how would it even work. Former presidents have protection for life so you couldn’t stick him in general population to meet Mr Motivator etc.
Best you could ever hope for is house arrest.
But think about it, rightly or wrongly Trump still has about 16 million supporters who probably own one or more firearms. That’s a rather large army to piss off regardless of the law of the land etc.
Maybe, Trump and BJ should share a cell ?
Don’t forget, if Trump thinks there is any chance of him sharing a cell with the home boys then he will be on a plane to sit beside Putin in cold but safe Russia and beyond all jurisdictions including Sir Kier and Co.
Derek, the Queen has always been above the law and so is any other individual, family or not if they in her presence unless she agrees they can be removed and arrested. As the law stands, the Met Police could be in the same room as her and Andrew with a warrant for him to attend court, she can tell them to leave and/or have them removed and nothing they can do. Unless someone is brave enough to change some laws etc.
I'm pretty sure only the queen is above the law and nobody in her presence regardless of what she says. Do you have a reliable reference for that info?
To be a member of NATO, one of the requirements is to have respect for the rule of law. We fall short of that as we allow the queen to break it if she wants to, so we should be kicked out of NATO.
There were serious debates about whether Washington would be “king” at the end of the revolution.
In most parts of the world the head of state is the human embodiment of the state and the thought of prosecution a mind bender. R v R?
Obviously there were lots of questions at the end of the Nixon presidency which is why Ford issued the pardon. Unpleasant but better than the alternative.
All society’s have grappled with ultimate authority. Should it be a non human concept - God - or a human embodiment. I guess the Anglo sphere has it both ways with the Queen ruling by divine right and for the US “in God we trust”.
In most parts of the world the head of state is the human embodiment of the state and the thought of prosecution a mind bender. R v R?
Obviously there were lots of questions at the end of the Nixon presidency which is why Ford issued the pardon. Unpleasant but better than the alternative.
All society’s have grappled with ultimate authority. Should it be a non human concept - God - or a human embodiment. I guess the Anglo sphere has it both ways with the Queen ruling by divine right and for the US “in God we trust”.
Different alternatives came to Charles I and Louis XVI.
But then a society that executes it’s monarch really changes things a big way from that point. Hope we are not headed there. I can wait before another Robespierre or Lenin ushers us towards their new utopia.
But then a society that executes it’s monarch really changes things a big way from that point. Hope we are not headed there. I can wait before another Robespierre or Lenin ushers us towards their new utopia.
You're well versed in British/European history!gazuty wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 1:43 amDifferent alternatives came to Charles I and Louis XVI.
But then a society that executes it’s monarch really changes things a big way from that point. Hope we are not headed there. I can wait before another Robespierre or Lenin ushers us towards their new utopia.
Now that you mention the execution of heads of state (or is it head of states? ), the US has the death penalty and Trump has done far worse than many (or any) of the people he had executed. It would also solve the issue Archery raised concerning his security detail or house arrest.
Off topic and should be in the books I’ve read section
Gazuty recommends -
The Age of Genius: The Seventeenth Century and the Birth of the Modern Mind - A C Grayling. (Name drop, we’ve met and I’ve got an autographed copy).
And the following podcasts.
https://open.spotify.com/show/05lvdf9T7 ... QbmTwUwgDw
https://open.spotify.com/show/6wiEd40oP ... hqnO16sslg
-
- Posts: 3217
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
Derek, nobody can be arrested in the queens presence without her say so. That’s a fact. Why do you think Andrew stays close to her and/or her residence.
People always quote the, nobody is above the law. Wrong, the Queen is and so are those with diplomatic protection given their status.
As it currently stands the UK cannot arrest, detain or charge a US diplomat regardless of what he or she may have done etc once they know their diplomatic status. That law/rule has been around since 1952 and never argued or changed by any UK government since.
To give you a very real and sick example would the Hyde Park bombings. Both the UK and Irish governments know who carried them out. Tony Blair does, so does John Major. They immune from prosecution because of the good Friday agreement.
You really telling me, nobody is above the law ?
People always quote the, nobody is above the law. Wrong, the Queen is and so are those with diplomatic protection given their status.
As it currently stands the UK cannot arrest, detain or charge a US diplomat regardless of what he or she may have done etc once they know their diplomatic status. That law/rule has been around since 1952 and never argued or changed by any UK government since.
To give you a very real and sick example would the Hyde Park bombings. Both the UK and Irish governments know who carried them out. Tony Blair does, so does John Major. They immune from prosecution because of the good Friday agreement.
You really telling me, nobody is above the law ?
The sovereign is not above the law as such - the sovereign is the law (but for all practical purposes I get what you are saying). And all legal acts of the state are carried out in the name sovereign - The Queen v [name of accused]. Be found guilty and you are detained by her majesty in her majesty’s prison. You are in fact detained by the monarch, dear old Betty Windsor.
You are only left with regicide and a revolution if the sovereign goes berserk.
I never said nobody is above the law. I said the contrary, the queen is above the law. The question I asked is, do you have a source that suggests people in the presence of the queen are immune to prosecution?Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 2:10 amDerek, nobody can be arrested in the queens presence without her say so. That’s a fact. Why do you think Andrew stays close to her and/or her residence.
People always quote the, nobody is above the law. Wrong, the Queen is and so are those with diplomatic protection given their status.
As it currently stands the UK cannot arrest, detain or charge a US diplomat regardless of what he or she may have done etc once they know their diplomatic status. That law/rule has been around since 1952 and never argued or changed by any UK government since.
To give you a very real and sick example would the Hyde Park bombings. Both the UK and Irish governments know who carried them out. Tony Blair does, so does John Major. They immune from prosecution because of the good Friday agreement.
You really telling me, nobody is above the law ?
My mother's reached ninety and sadly has Alzheimer's, needing constant care. In the last year or two when she was living in her house, we were constantly telling her to stop lighting candles, try to lift heavy objects or do other hazardous things.gazuty wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 2:30 amThe sovereign is not above the law as such - the sovereign is the law (but for all practical purposes I get what you are saying). And all legal acts of the state are carried out in the name sovereign - The Queen v [name of accused]. Be found guilty and you are detained by her majesty in her majesty’s prison. You are in fact detained by the monarch, dear old Betty Windsor.
You are only left with regicide and a revolution if the sovereign goes berserk.
Whilst I admire how sharp the queen is intellectually, I saw footage of her cutting a cake with a sword. The way she was handling that sword I would not have wanted to be near her. If that was my mother I would have stepped in and taken the sword off her, given her a suitable knife and helped her cut it. None of those idiots in fancy suits, hats and decorations are really able to do that. As I found out, Alzheimer's can fall on a victim quite quickly. One year my mother cooked me Christmas dinner and the next we were cooking it for her!
So the queen could go berserk any day, while we have a PM partying at Chequers who wouldn't be fussed about it and two of his supporters are fighting each other to replace him. How great it is to be British.
-
- Posts: 3217
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
The Queen is covered by what is known as sovereign immunity in the UK. It means that the sovereign cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil or criminal proceedings.
The Queen is careful to ensure that all her activities in her personal capacity are carried out in strict accordance with the law."
While the Queen cannot be arrested, other members of the Royal Family can be, unless they are with her. The law also states that no arrests can be made in the monarch's presence, or within the surroundings of a royal palace.
Further details can be found at https://britishheritage.com/
The Queen is careful to ensure that all her activities in her personal capacity are carried out in strict accordance with the law."
While the Queen cannot be arrested, other members of the Royal Family can be, unless they are with her. The law also states that no arrests can be made in the monarch's presence, or within the surroundings of a royal palace.
Further details can be found at https://britishheritage.com/
-
- Posts: 1074
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:38 am
Been a lot in the papers about this recently... My understanding is that its not so much the presence as the place that is important regarding arrests (of non-queeny types), i.e. there are specific exemptions in English & Scottish law which means the police cannot investigate or arrest anyone on the "queens properties", both state & private without her permission.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:58 amThe Queen is covered by what is known as sovereign immunity in the UK. It means that the sovereign cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil or criminal proceedings.
The Queen is careful to ensure that all her activities in her personal capacity are carried out in strict accordance with the law."
While the Queen cannot be arrested, other members of the Royal Family can be, unless they are with her. The law also states that no arrests can be made in the monarch's presence, or within the surroundings of a royal palace.
Further details can be found at https://britishheritage.com/
Examples include Andrew running away to Balmoral so papers could not be served re rape case & Prince Harry (& pals) shooting protected birds of prey at Sandringham... In the later case the investigating authorities were not allowed access to the property when requested and when they eventually did get access found a group of retainers clearing up any evidence.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... es-decried
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... e-property
"Under the longstanding but ill-defined doctrine of sovereign immunity, criminal and civil proceedings are not brought against the monarch as head of state. But an investigation by the Guardian, drawing on official documents and analysis of legislation, reveals the extent to which laws have been written or amended to specify immunity for her conduct as a private citizen, along with her privately owned assets and estates – and even a privately owned business"